Davis, Doolittle, Foot, Grimes, Hale, Harding, Harlan, Henderson, Hendricks, Howe, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Nesmith, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Saulsbury, Sherman, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, and Wright -27.

NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Dixon, Fessenden, Foster, Harris, Howard, Sprague, Sumner, Wilkinson, and Wilson-11.

The following words were subsequently added: "and the bounty, pay, or expense of said enlistments shall not be paid out of said commutation fund," and the amendment of Mr. Clark adopted. Other amendments were adopted, and the bill passed the Senate by the following vote:

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Clark, Collamer, Conness, Cowan, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Hale, Harding, Harlan, Harris, Howard, Johnson, Lane of Kansas, Morgan, Morrill, Nesmith, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sprague, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Van Winkle, Wade, Willey, and Wilson-30.

NAYS-Messrs. Buckalew, Carlile, Grimes, Hendricks, Howe, Lane of Indiana, Powell, Saulsbury, Wilkinson, and Wright-10.

The bill came before the House, and various amendments were proposed. On the 10th of February Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, moved to strike out the twentieth section, and insert the following:

All able-bodied male persons of African descent, between the ages of twenty and forty-five years, whether citizens or not, resident in the United States, shall be enrolled according to the provisions of the act to which this is a supplement, and form part of the national forces. And when a slave shall have been drafted and mustered into the service of the

United States his master shall have a certificate

thereof which shall entitle him to receive $300 from the United States, and the drafted man shall be free. He said: "I think that that class of persons ought to form a part of the national forces. I know that they are now taken, as in Maryland, for instance, and I suppose they will be in other places. I do not say that it is contrary to law, but I prefer that it should be done under a known law."

It was suggested to Mr. Stevens to modify his amendment "so as to pay loyal men only for their slaves." He further said: "I modify my amendment in that respect, by adding the words, 'provided that the slaves of loyal men only shall be paid for.' My amendment will not only make this class of persons bear their part of the fighting burden of the nation, but it will also tend finally to eradicate slavery from all the States; eradicate it under necessity, and with compensation to the masters. Although we are now doing it-I will not say against law, but I do not precisely know under what law I think it right that it should be done according to law. Of course this refers only to the loyal States."

Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, followed, saying: "You have told us in the border States, when we have appealed to you, that you intended to respect the laws and constitutions of those States. The enemies of the Union, those in those States called secessionists, have charged against the northern people that it was their

Mr. Boutwell, of Massachusetts, replied: "I desire to say in reply to the gentleman from Kentucky, that in the laws of Kentucky, so far as I know, slaves were recognized as property but still recognized as persons; and I think that the border States should understand, at least so we have reached that emergency when men in far as I am concerned, that slaves as inhabitants of the country are to be used as other men are used, to put down this rebellion. No constitution or law of any State shall stand between me and what I believe to be my duty to my country."

Mr. Morris, of New York, said: "Mr. Chairman, as I understand existing laws, the Government, when it deems it to be necessary, may seize the property of any citizen and use it for the purpose of prosecuting this war. I see no difference between seizing the property of the northern States and that of the border States. I do not see why the property of the border States should be exempted."

Mr. Davis, of Maryland, moved to amend the amendment by striking out so much of it as provided for the payment of $300 to the owner of the drafted slave. He said: "I do it on this ground: if the slaves are liable to military duty at all, they are liable to military duty on the same ground as every person is who owes obedience to the laws; on the same ground that the citizen of the country, the subjects of the country, the denizens of the country owing temporary allegiance to the Government are bound to defend it. If they owe military service, we owe the master nothing for taking what the slaves owe."

Mr. Mallory, of Kentucky, opposed it, saying: "I think, Mr. Chairman, that the question is narrowed down simply to this: if the Government of the United States have the right to take from me my property in the service and labor of my slave, it is restricted and limited by that provision of the Constitution which says that private property shall not be taken without just compensation. Then, I ask the gentleman from Maryland, how is just compensation ascertained? Is it done by a law of the Government fixing it, or by any ex parte proceedings of that kind? He knows it is not. He knows that that would be unjust and unconstitutional. If you propose to compensate the owner of a slave, you must ascertain the value of the property as you do the value of any other property that the Government chooses to take for its use. You must ascertain the value of that property as you

ascertain the value of land taken for a road, by a jury summoned under a writ of ad quod damnum. The amendment of the gentleman from Maryland ignores this right, violates it in a plain, distinct, and palpable manner, and is contrary to the Constitution of the United States." The amendment proposed by Mr. Davis was now accepted by Mr. Stevens. Mr. Davis now further moved as an amendment, to add as follows:

The Secretary of War shall appoint a commission in each of the slave States represented in Congress, charged to award a just compensation to each loyal owner of any slave who may volunteer into the service of the United States, payable out of the commutation money.

He said: "Mr. Chairman, I submit that amendment for this reason: not because I think it is due at all to the owner of the slave, but because the President and the Secretary of War in executing the law of 1862, allowing the President to use and organize persons of African descent to suppress the rebellion, have seen fit to appoint a commission, which is now in session in Maryland, for the purpose of estimating the value of and awarding reasonable compensation to the loyal owners of slaves who may volunteer in the service of the United States under the law of 1862. That brings the volunteering of slaves into some sort of correspondence with the established policy of the Government in paying bounties to volunteers, the difference being that in the case of the slave the bounty is paid to the master instead on his freeing the slave, whereas the bounty in the case of the white volunteer of course goes to himself.

"But the difference between that proposition and the proposition to pay drafted men is this: the volunteer having offered his services to the Government, the Government is of course at liberty to alleviate the burden which may be thrown upon the slaveowner, as far as it sees fit. It is a very different thing to impose upon the Government when it is driven to draft men the necessity of paying to every slaveowner a compensation for any slave that may be drafted. It is unequal, and I am sure every gentleman will see that it is in a moment. The poor man whose son works for him on his ten acres receives no compensation for that son when he is drafted into the service, while the wealthy slaveholder, who has three or four hundred slaves alongside, is to receive a compensation of $300 for every one of his slaves who may be drafted."

Mr. Webster, of Maryland, said: "Sir, the question before us is not the right to take slaves for military service, but the expediency of so doing. For myself, I am free to confess that in the earlier stages of the war, when it seemed probable that the rebellion would be crushed at no distant day, and without serious interference with the domestic institutions of the States, believing as I did and do in the superiority of the white man as a soldier, I was unwilling to arm the negro. But now, sir, when we approach

the end of the third year of this war, and it is still huge in its dimensions; when call for troops follows call in quick succession; when draft after draft is made, and the drain upon our people for soldiers is grievous to be borne, I am for using all the means known to the law in suppressing the rebellion. I would put arms in the hands of all men capable of bearing them. The experience of the last twelve months has shown that the negro, though not so efficient a soldier as the white man, will fight bravely, and can be made a valuable auxiliary in the prosecution of the war and the restoration of the Union. Sir, his aid is not to be rejected, at least I will not assist in its rejection."

Mr. Harris, of Maryland, opposed the amendment, saying: "If you could properly enlist slaves, I am opposed to the degradation which such an act would bring upon a nation situated as this is. What are you fighting? Five million white men. You claim to be twenty million white men, and yet with such odds in your favor, and with means of blockading southern ports and almost starving them into subjection, you come here and command that the flag of your country shall be intrusted to the poor slaves. I say it is a degradation of the United States flag, and no man who duly honors that flag has heretofore ever undertaken at such odds to deprave the country and tarnish its honor by such any proceeding."

Mr. Mallory, of Kentucky, also opposed the amendment, urging objections as follows: "I ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the gentleman from Iowa, and the gentlemen on that side of the House, what they have got to do with the matter? If we allow you to put your free negroes into the army-and I have no objection to your putting them upon your enrolment list-what right have you to insist that our slaves in Kentucky shall be placed upon our enrolment list? You demand from Kentucky a certain number of men for the army upon this call. We who live in Kentucky say that we have the right to decide who those men shall be. If you are in earnest, if you really desire to raise men to fill our armies, that is the course by which you will accomplish that object. But if you are not in earnest; if you have another and a different object to accomplish covertly, by the operation of the bill; if you wish to demoralize and destroy the institution of slavery in my State, then the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Stevens) is a wise one for the accomplishment of that purpose. Sir, I know the gentleman from Pennsylvania, I know him to be a bold man, I know him to be a frank and candid man, and I know this to be his argument; I know that if his simple, sole object by this bill was to raise an army, he would admit that the course I have marked is the proper one to ac complish that object."

The amendment to the amendment was adopted-yeas, 84; nays, 71.

Mr. Harding, of Kentucky, said: "I move

to amend the proposed amendment by adding thereto the following proviso:

Provided, That the provisions of this section in regard to slaves, shall not apply to the State of Kentucky.

"I regret that it becomes necessary, on a matter of such vital importance as this, to plead and plead for even five minutes' time. As my colleague (Mr. Mallory) very properly remarked, what more do gentlemen desire than that Kentucky shall furnish her proper quota of men and contribute her proper amount of money? It is manifest to every man that this seeks to inaugurate a general scheme of emancipation in the loyal slaveholding States. That can no longer be disguised. Gentlemen are disposed to pass it by as if that was a clear constitutional right. Sir, it is an absolute violation of the constitutions both of Kentucky and of the United States. No man can meet that proposition in argument. From the foundation of the Government to the present time the right to slave property was secured by all the laws, and approved by the Constitution, as much as the right to land was secured. It is a constitutional right in the State of Kentucky to hold slaves; and there can be no system of general emancipation inaugurated under the pretence of raising soldiers except by a plain and palpable violation of the Constitution. "Moreover, sir, slaves have never been regarded as forming part of the military force of the country. They are property. A man in Kentucky holds his slaves by the same title as he holds his land. I defy any man to draw a distinction between the two. The title is as clear to slaves in Kentucky as it is to a man's home and land; and that spirit which will run lawlessly over the one would need but little temptation to run as lawlessly over the other. I beg gentlemen of the Republican party to look back a few years to the Chicago platform, and see what its language was. It was, that the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially of the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, was essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our system depended. I embodied that same profession in a resolution which I offered a few days ago, and it was unceremoniously laid on the table; seventy-three members on the other side rising and voting to lay it on the table. I deny that there is any constitutional power to wrest a slave from his owner, either by taking the slave as a volunteer or as a conscript. You have no right to do it even though you allow compensation. You cannot inaugurate emancipation in that indirect way. The President has disclaimed, and the Republican party has again and again disclaimed, all power to do so. And yet now it is proposed to violate all these pledges, to trample under foot this platform, and with it the Constitution of the United States, in order to bring about emancipation by

a wholesale system of robbery. Do you propose to take the loyal man's slave at a fair valuation? No, you propose to take him by conscription, to take him by an arbitrary process, and to fix his price by the same power. It amounts to nothing but robbery. It is a mockery of justice. The highwayman might as well seize my horse and take him from me, and then offer me a pittance."

The amendment to the amendment was lost and the amendment was agreed to. Other amendments were made, when it was moved to strike out all after the first section of the bill and insert a substitute, which was carried, and the bill then passed by the following vote:

YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Anderson, Arnold, Ashley, Bailey, John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Beaman, Jacob B. Blair, Boutwell, Boyd, Brandegee, Broomall, William G. Brown, Cobb, Cole, Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Thomas T. Davis, Dawes, Deming, Dixon, Driggs, Eckley, Eliot, Farnsworth, Frank, Garfield, Gooch, Grinnell, Griswold, Hale, Higby, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Hulburd, Hutchins, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Orlando Kellogg, Loan, Longyear, Marvin, McAllister, McBride, McDaniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Clurg, McIndoe, Samuel F. Miller, Moorhead, Morrill, Odell, Charles O'Neill, Orth, Perham, Pike, Pomeroy, William H. Randall, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Edward H. Rollins, Schenck, Scofield, Shannon, Sloan, Smith, Smithers, Spalding, Starr, Stevens, Thayer, Thomas, Tracy, Upson, Van Valkenburgh, Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Webster, Whaley, Wheeler, Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, and Woodbridge-94.

NAYS-Messrs. James C. Allen, William J. Allen, Ancona, Augustus C. Baldwin, Bliss, Brooks, James S. Brown, Chanler, Coffroth, Cox, Cravens, Dawson, Dennison, Eden, Edgerton, Eldridge, Finek, Ganson, Grider, Hall, Harding, Harrington, Benjamin G. Harris, Herrick, Holman, William Johnson, Kalbfleisch, Kernan, Knapp, Law, Lazear, Le Blond, Long, Mallory, Marcy, McDowell, McKinney, William H. Miller, James R. Morris, Morrison, Nelson, Noble, John O'Neill, Pendleton, Radford, Samuel J. Randall, Robinson, Rogers, Ross, Scott, John B. Steele, Stiles, Strouse, Stuart, Sweat, Voorhees, nando Wood-60. Wadsworth, Joseph W. White, Winfield, and Fer

This resulted in striking out after the first section of the Senate bill, and substituting a House bill containing the amendments adopted and many provisions of the Senate bill.

A Committee of Conference between the two houses was appointed, and their report was made in the Senate on the 19th February. A debate ensued which resulted in the adoption of the report by the Senate-yeas, 26; nays, 16. In the House, the report was adopted-yeas, 71; nays, 23.

This act changed the law of March 3d, 1863, by abolishing the two classes of enrolled men; authorizing the President to call for men whenever he deemed it necessary; making drafted men subject to the liabilities of their substitutes, and exempt only for the term for which the draft was made; abolishing all exemptions except for physical disability, service for two years, and being in the service. The other details were of less importance.

In the Senate, on the 8th of June, a new bill was reported from the Military Committee, and considered, the object of which was "to prohibit the discharge of persons from liability to military duty, by reason of the payment of money." The following message was also submitted from the President:

WASHINGTON, D. C., June 8, 1864. To the Senate and House of Representatives: I have the honor to submit for the consideration of Congress a letter and inclosure from the Secretary of War, with my concurrence in the recommendation therein made ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON CITY, June 7, 1864. [

SIR: I beg leave to submit to you a report made to me by the Provost Marshal General, showing the result of the draft now going on to fill the deficiency in the quotas of certain States, and recommending a repeal of the clause in the enrolment act commonly known as the $300 clause. The recommendation of the Provost Marshal General is approved by this Department, and I trust that it will be recommended by you to Congress.

The recent successes that have attended our arms

lead to the hope, that by maintaining our military strength, and giving it such an increase as the extended field of operations may require, an early termination of the war may be attained. But to accomplish this it is absolutely necessary that efficient means be taken, with vigor and promptness, to keep the army up to its strength, and supply deficiencies occasioned by the losses sustained by casualties in the field. To that end resort must be had to a draft, but ample experience has now shown that the pecuniary exemption from service frustrates the object of the enrolment law by furnishing money instead of

men.

An additional reason for repealing the $300 clause is, that it is contemplated to make the draft for a comparatively short term. den of military service will therefore be lightened, but its certainty of furnishing troops is an absolute

essential to success.

The bur

I have the honor to be, your obedient servant, EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

To the PRESIDENT.

WAR DEPARTMENT, PROVOST MARSHAL GENERAL'S OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C., June 6, 1864. SIR: In accordance with the amended enrolment act, approved February 24th, 1864, and your orders on the subject, I am now conducting a draft in various sub-districts for their respective deficiencies on quotas of troops heretofore assigned. The results of this draft, so far as shown by reports of this date, are worthy of attention. They are, briefly, as follows:

Number of drafted men examined,

Number exempted for physical disability, 4,374
Number exempted for all other causes, . 2,632

14,741

7,016

5,050

Number who have furnished substitutes, 1,416

. 1,259

7,725

These reports come from sub-districts in eight different States. I invite your attention to the small proportion of soldiers being obtained under the existing law. I see no reason to believe that the army

can be materially strengthened by draft so long as the $300 clause is in force, nor do I think it safe to will enable the Government to procure a volunteer assume that the commutation paid by a drafted man or substitute in his place. I do not think that large bounties by the United States should be again resorted to for raising troops. I recommend that the $300 clause, as it is known, be repealed. I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, JAMES B. FRY, Provost Marshal General.

Hon. E. M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

A bill was subsequently introduced and passed which abolished the payment of $300 as commutation, limited the service to one year, and allowed no exemption except for alienage, previous service of two years, and physical disability. (See ARMY U. S.)

It passed the Senate on June 30th, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Clark, Conness, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Hale, Lane of Kansas, Mor gan, Morrill, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sumner, Van Winkle, Wade, Wilkinson, and Wilson-18.

NAYS-Messrs. Buckalew, Carlile, Davis, Doolittle, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Hendricks, Howe, Lane of Indiana, McDougall, Powell, Riddle, Saulsbury, Sherman, Trumbull, and Willey-17.

ABSENT-Messrs. Brown, Collamer, Cowan, Dixon, Grimes, Harding, Hicks, Howard, Johnson, Nesmith, Richardson, Sprague, Ten Eyck, and Wright-14.

It passed the House by the adoption of a report of a Conference Committee, July 2d, by the following vote:

John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Beaman, Blair, Boutwell, YEAS-Messrs. Allison, Ames, Arnold, Ashley, Boyd, Cobb, Cole, Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Dawes, Deming, Dixon, Driggs, Eckley, Eliot, FarnsWorth, Fenton, Garfield, Gooch, Higby, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Longyear, McBride, McClurg, Samuel F. Miller, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Julian, Kelley, Littlejohn, Loan, Moorhead, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Orth, William H. Randall, John H. Rice, Schenck, Shannon, Sloan, Smith, Smithers, Spalding, Tracy, Upson, Van Valkenburgh, Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, and Woodbridge-65.

NAYS-Messrs. William J. Allen, Alley, Ancona, Bailey, Blaine, Bliss, Chanler, Coffroth, Cox, Dawson, Dennison, Eden, Edgerton, Eldridge, English, Frank, Ganson, Griswold, Benjamin G. Harris, Charles M. Harris, Hutchins, Kernan, Knapp, Law, Le Blond, Long, Mallory, Marcy, Middleton, William H. Miller, James R. Morris, Noble, Odell, Patterson, Pendleton, Perham, Pruyn, Samuel J. Randall, Alexander H. Rice, Robinson, Edward H. Rollins, James S. Rollins, Ross, Scofield, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, Stevens, Stiles, Thomas, Wadsworth, Webster, Wheeler, and Winfield-53.

In the House, on December 14th, 1863, Mr. Finck, of Ohio, offered the following resolution relative to the object of the war:

Whereas, in the opinion of this House, the Federal Government is invested by the Constitution of the United States with all necessary power and authority to suppress any resistance to the due execution of the laws thereof, and to employ the Army and Navy in aid of the civil authority to disperse all armed resistance to the rightful power and jurisdiction of the United States; and whereas, in the judgment of this House, the Army and Navy cannot be rightfully used to subjugate and hold as conquered territory any of the States of this Union; therefore,

Be it resolved, That in this national emergency Congress will forego all feeling of mere passion or resentment, and will recollect only its duty to the country; that this war should not be waged on our part in any spirit of oppression, nor in any spirit of conquest or subjugation, nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of the States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution, and preserve the Union with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired, and as soon as these objects are attained the war ought to cease.

condition, except unconditional submission to the Constitution and laws of the United States. In the language heretofore solemnly adopted by Congress, the war ought not to be waged on our part for any purpose of conquest or subjugation or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution, and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired, and as soon as those objects are accomplished the war ought to cease.

YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Anderson, Arnold, Ashley, John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Beman, Blaine, Boutwell, Boyd, Broomall, William G. Brown, Ambrose W. Clark, Freeman Clarke, Cobb, Cole, Henry Winter Davis, Thomas T. Davis, Deming, Driggs, Dumont, Eckley, Eliot, Farnsworth, Frank, Garfield, Gooch, Grinnell, Higby, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Orlando Kellogg, Loan, Marvin, McBride, McClurg, Samuel F. Miller, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Orth, Patterson, Pike, Pomeroy, Price, William H. Randall, Alexander H. Rice, Edward H. Rollins, Schenck, Schofield, Shannon, Sloan, Smith, Smithers, Spaulding, Starr, Stevens, Thayer, Thomas, Upson, Van Valkenburgh, Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Whaley, Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, and Woodbridge NAYS-Messrs. James C. Allen, William J. Allen, Ancona, Augustus C. Baldwin, Francis P. Blair, Bliss, James S. Brown, Chanler, Clay, Coffroth, Cox, Cravens, Dawson, Dennison, Eden, Eldridge, English, Finck, Ganson, Grider, Hale, Harding, Harrington, Benjamin G. Harris, Herrick, Holman, Philip Johnson, William Johnson, Kernan, King, Knapp, Law, Lazear, Marcy, McAllister, McDowell, McKinney, Middleton, James R. Morris, Morrison, Nelson, Odell, Pendleton, Perry, Pruyn, Samuel J. Randall, Robinson, Rogers, James S. Rollins, Ross, Scott, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, Strouse, Stuart, Sweat, Voorhees, Webster, Wheeler, Chilton A. White, Joseph W. White, Winfield, and Fernando Wood-64.

-81.

On December 14th Mr. Holman, of Indiana, offered the following on the same subject:

Resolved, That the doctrine recently announced,

that the States in which an armed insurrection has existed against the Federal Government have ceased to be States of the Union, and shall be held, on the ultimate defeat of that insurrection, as Territories or subjugated provinces, and governed as such by the absolute will of Congress and the Federal Executive, or restored to the Union on conditions unknown to the Constitution of the United States, ought to be rebuked and condemned as manifestly unjust to the loyal citizens of those States, tending to prolong the war and to confirm the treasonable theory of secession; and, if carried into effect, must greatly endanger the public liberty and the constitutional powers and rights of all the States, by centralizing and consolidating the powers of the Government, State and national, in the Federal Executive.

Resolved, That the only object of the war ought to be to subjugate the armed insurrection which, for the time being, suspends the proper relations of certain States with the Federal Government, and to reestablish the supremacy of the Constitution; and the loyal citizens of those States, and the masses of the people thereof, submitting to the authority of the Constitution, ought not to be hindered from restoring the proper relations of their respective States with the Federal Government, so far as the same is dependent on the voluntary act of the people, by any

Congress for the support of the military and naval forces of the Government, and all measures of legislation necessary to increase and promote the efficiency of the Army and Navy and to maintain the public credit, ought to be adopted, that, through a vigorous prosecution of the war, peace on the basis of the union of the States and the supremacy of the Constitution may be the more speedily obtained.

Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, moved to lay the resolution on the table, which was ordered by the following vote:

Baldwin, Baxter, Beaman, Blaine, Blow, Boutwell, YEAS-Messrs. Alley, Arnold, Ashley, John D. Boyd, Brandegee, Broomall, Ambrose W. Clark, Freeman Clarke, Clay, Cobb, Cole, Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Dawes, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, DuGarfield, Gooch, Grinnell, Higby, Hooper, Hotchmont, Eckley, Eliot, Farnsworth, Fenton, Frank, kiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, HulOrlando Kellogg, Loan, Longyear, Lovejoy, Marvin, burd, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Francis W. Kellogg, McBride, McClurg, McIndoe, Samuel F. Miller, Moorhead, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Orth, PatRandall, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Edward terson, Perham, Pike, Pomeroy, Price, William H. H. Rollins, James S. Rollins, Schenck, Scofield, Shannon, Sloan, Smithers, Spaulding, Stevens, Thayer, Thomas, Upson, Van Valkenburgh, Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Whaley, Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, and Woodbridge

-88.

NAYS-Messrs. James C. Allen, William J. Allen, Ancona, Bailey, Augustus C. Baldwin, Jacob B. Blair, Bliss, Brooks, William G. Brown, Chanler, Coffroth, Cox, Cravens, Dawson, Dennison, Eden, Edgerwold, Hall, Harding, Harrington, Benjamin G. Harton, Eldridge, English Finck, Ganson, Grider, Grisris, Charles M. Harris, Herrick, Holman, William Johnson, Kernan, King, Knapp, Law, Lazear, Le Blond, Long, Mallory, Marcy, McDowell McKinney, William H. Miller, James R. Morris, Morrison, Nelson, Noble, Odell, John O'Neill, Pendleton, Robinson, Rogers, Ross, Scott, Smith, John B. Steele, Stuart, Voorhies, Wadsworth, Ward, Wheeler, Chilton A. White, Joseph W. White, Winfield, Fernando Wood, and Yeaman--66.

On the 16th, Mr. Rollins, of Missouri, offered the following resolution :

Resolved by the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, That, prompted by a just patriotism, we are in favor of an earnest and successful prosecution of the war, and that we will give a warm and hearty support to all those measures which will be most effective in speedily overcoming the rebellion, and in securing a restoration of peace, and which may not substantially infringe the Constitution, and tend to subvert the true theory and character of the Government; and we hereby reiterate that the present deplorable civil war has been forced upon the country by the disunionists now in revolt against the constitutional Government; that in the progress of this war, Congress, banishing all feeling